A paradox of modern masculinity

If you want to succeed in marrying, having children, and raising a family, you have to be prepared to judge the right time to grab a woman unexpectedly and kiss her without waiting for her explicit consent.

If you want to avoid charges of sexual assault you must never even consider grabbing a woman unexpectedly and kissing her without waiting for her explicit consent.

CJ:
Well before the Current Year it was the case that such an unsolicited action dramatically reduced one’s odds of reproducing through both rejection by the female and sometimes-fatal injuries inflicted by her father/brothers.

Is there an acceptable way of asking a woman if you can grab her genitalia?

I fell in love with the Bride back in the 1960s when we were both in High School. It really was love at first sight for me (I think she is just being kind in claiming that was true for her also).

Now, the 1960s were not notable for sexual abstemiousness but I don’t ever recall any of my friends ever asking a girl for such permission.

No, back in the day, we adolescent males just used to gather on one of the staircase landings where we would pretend to talk sports while all of the beautiful young women in our high cchool would be walking up and down the stairs wearing their short skirts pretending they thought we were talking sports.

Kissing can in fact qualify as assault. Official military (or at any rate Navy) policy is (or has been? seems like the change the wording a bit every so often and this month starts the new fiscal year) roughly that unwanted flirting is Sexual Harassment and unwanted touching is Sexual Assault, with whether or not it qualifies hinging on the perception of the victim. I expect similarly worded statutes exist in at least a few civilian jurisdictions.

True, pretty much nobody actually treats it quite that way. Everybody makes their own unprincipled “common sense” exceptions, though that’s not unique to this particular set of directives, and “informal resolution” (actually there are forms even for that) is heavily preferred by any CO with a lick of sense. But I’d be mildly surprised if there had NEVER been a case where a sailor got hit for sexual assault over a kiss.

“Sexual assault” is an unhelpful category because it lumps so many different things together. In Ohio, grabbin’ em by the hoohah would be sexual imposition, a 3rd degree misdemeanor, unless said hoohah was unclothed. That would make it gross sexual imposition, a 3rd degree felony with a presumption of prison time.

CJ:
Yes, that ‘lumping’ is exactly the problem. It also seems to be the lever in the “kissing women without consent” question, and in lumping that together with “grabbing by the …”.

There are fairly obvious no fly zones in functional society. Other behaviors are merely rude, and still others are not a problem at all qua category — though just about any act can be rude in a particular context.

Unfortunately we don’t live in a functional society. We live in a society that celebrates female sluttiness and criminalizes male rudeness.

We live in a society that celebrates female sluttiness and criminalizes male rudeness.

This is one reason why conservatism is a walking corpse of a movement. Conservatives refuse to believe that they live in a society where this holds true. Listening to most conservatives, you’d think that every delta was a Lothario in the making and every gamma a PUA bootcamp away from getting laid like tile while his poor wife sits there crocheting mittens dutifully for her children like June Cleaver.

I’ve also noticed that most anti-Trump Christians never really want to talk about Clinton’s moral failings. We are to believe that “grabbing pu$$y” is on par or worse than treason for profit. Your comment about varying forms and degrees of Hell actually made me realize something about that; what crime, aside from treason, has a man most perfectly emulate the original crime of Satan?

The key here is that in every single case so far in which we record that Donald Trump is accused by “yet another woman” of “sexual assault”, it has not yet actually been sexual assault. The worst we’ve seen is that he admitted on camera to maybe groping someone and some women think he maybe kind of sort of did after Clinton paid them.

But that’s besides the point. Even if what the women are saying is entirely true, Trump isn’t guilty of “sexual assault”. He’s guilty of groping people. There’s a difference.

malcolm:
Despite the fact that she and her husband are two of the most despicable people on the planet, Clinton attacked Trump’s most vulnerable spot. The thought that any woman, anywhere, no matter what is true about herself, has ever been subject to anything less that obsequious respect and deference is just intolerable to feminists and socons alike. So this attack unifies everyone who hates Trump and gives them an excuse to support Grandma Abortion Witch.

I really think that most people already knew this about Trump. You’d have to have had your head in the sand to think anything else. As I said in the other thread, it is as if the Republican party had nominated Hugh Hefner and then were shocked – shocked! – when, in October before the election, his opponent revealed that he is a womanizer.

Deciding just now not to support Trump because he is a womanizer like Slick Willie doesn’t reveal principle. It reveals an easily manipulated mind.